In perhaps the simplest form, one may ask what collateral damage university IP policies do to research, just as one might ask whether central plans for rebuilding a city have much to offer the areas to be rebuilt. In this, it is essential that we understand the street, or in research, the analogues of the street, the local practices, those things that make for a vital research effort rather than enabling a monoculture of blight.
In this, a professional organization like AUTM may feel some pressure. So might some university administrators. To spark at bureaucratic power is no light-hearted thing. Folks fear for their jobs if they speak out. AUTM as an organization can be anything it chooses to be. What it cannot do is require that people talk about it in terms of its rationalizations rather than its effects.
This is about how research is done, and can be done, and who is going to set the agenda for how that living–for it is living–is to be done.
To be in the ordered domain on the edge of chaos. To work with the wild, reckless, inventive, urgeful, and largely unmanageable but remarkably capable, self-governing thing that is the street life of inquiry.